Sanghyeon Seo wrote: > 2007/10/28, KHMan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> In the end, my personal opinion is that revision control systems >> matters much less than having good maintainers (or even just >> commit monkeys) that can unite the community, keep discussions >> from blowing up, and set the correct tone (i.e. one that >> encourages participation and diversity rather than insist on >> strict obeisance to the maintainer's practices, tools and >> philosophy.) > > That sounds like Rob Landley to me. He is coding, you aren't.
This is what I mean, you know. This discussion is going round in circles, and Mr Seo, you are not discussing but baiting. However skilled one is in coding, maintaining a project entails much more than coding. You are making a comparison that no one of us can fulfill. Rob was the only recent "maintainer", everyone else, IIRC, submitted patches. Of course then, *no* *one* can compare to Rob. So, am I disqualified from giving opinions and constructive criticism of Peter Jackson because I did not create an adaptation of The Lord of the Rings myself? Baiting is just a waste of everyone's time. Regardless of what Rob has or has not done, having development run on a private and personal repository has risks. Say, if Fabrice gets abducted by aliens, I can still grab the CVS from Savannah. So, regardless of how good or bad a maintainer is, I would still say that a public repository has a lower inherent risk. If there are public Mercurial hosts, all the better then, I guess. To my, shall I say, wholly inexperienced eyes, the abrupt manner in which Rob exited does not give him much merit, from the point of view of a collective community. Note carefully that I am arguing from an Eastern "collective benefit" rather than from a Western "personal benefit" point of view. Yet I believe Rob himself has made it clear on numerous occasions that he was only hosting an unofficial tree. That was why I also said that whatever his action where, he was well within his rights to do just that. So you see, instead of another "fork", coupled with the inherent risks of private infrastructure, isn't it better to have a public repository and focus instead on making it seem like tcc is being developed in one place and one tree only? If Mr Seo is interested in taking action, I hereby offer to help him sync the Mercurial snapshot that he has with the official CVS, passing whatever patches necessary to David Wheeler. -- Cheers, Kein-Hong Man (esq.) Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia _______________________________________________ Tinycc-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/tinycc-devel
